Role of High-sensitivity Cardiac Troponin in Acute Coronary Syndrome

Login or register to view PDF.
Creative Commons Licence
Abstract

Chest pain is one of the most common reasons for an emergency room (ER) visit in the US, with almost 6 million ER visits annually. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hscTn) assays have the ability to rapidly rule in or rule out acute coronary syndrome with improved sensitivity, and they are increasingly being used. Though hscTn assays have been approved for use in European, Australian, and Canadian guidelines since 2010, the FDA only approved their use in 2017. There is no consensus on how to compare the results from various hscTn assays. A literature review was performed to analyze the advantages and limitations of using hscTn as a standard biomarker to evaluate patients with suspected ACS in the emergency setting.

Disclosure
The authors have no conflicts of interests to declare.
Correspondence
Santiago Garcia, Minneapolis Heart Institute, 920 East 28th Street, Suite 300-MR 33300, Minneapolis, MN 55417. E: garci205@umn.edu
Received date
04 November 2018
Accepted date
04 February 2019
Citation
US Cardiology Review 2019;13(1):5–10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15420/usc.2018.16.1
Open access
This work is open access under the CC-BY-NC 4.0 License which allows users to copy, redistribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes, provided the original work is cited correctly.

Chest pain is one of the most common reasons for an emergency room (ER) visit in the US with almost 6 million ER visits annually.1

According to the fourth universal definition of MI, acute MI (AMI) requires a rise and/or fall in cardiac troponin (cTn) with at least one value above the 99th percentile upper reference limit.2,3 Cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and cardiac troponin T (cTnT) are the preferred biomarkers in acute coronary syndrome (ACS).2–5

Although contemporary cTn assays are used routinely in the US for risk stratification and the diagnosis of patients presenting with suspected ACS, they have important limitations compared to high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hscTn) assays:

  • They are highly imprecise: most contemporary assays have a total imprecision (coefficient of variation) of 10–20% at the 99th percentile for the diagnosis of AMI.
  • They have limited analytical sensitivity: contemporary assays can only quantify cTn in <35% of healthy individuals below the 99th percentile.4

These limitations have led to prolonged serial sampling protocols being used to achieve optimal diagnostic accuracy, which mean increases in hospitalizations, length of stay, and costs.4,6–10

In conventional troponin assays, troponin elevation is considered to be an all or nothing phenomenon. The presence of troponin elevation above the 99th percentile reference range suggests myocardial injury but no troponin elevation above the 99th percentile is considered normal, even though this does not necessarily mean the absence of an ACS, as conventional assays are unable to detect small ischemic events. Particularly where there is atypical chest pain and no troponin elevation, patients who are experiencing an ACS are at risk of being discharged early because the decision-making process is subjective.9

To overcome this difficulty, hscTn assays were introduced and have slowly gained importance. These can be used to classify patients more appropriately as ‘true’ or ‘no’ ACS, and do not require repeat assays at 6 and 12 hours, unlike conventional cTn assays. HscTn assays are able to detect troponins at a concentration about 1/10 of the lower reference range of conventional troponin assays.2

While hscTn assays have been in clinical use since 2015 in Europe, the FDA only approved their use in the US in 2017.7 There is a lack of clarity on interpreting the results of hscTn assays, despite a decade of published studies, as they differ significantly from conventional troponin assays.10

This review discusses the basics of hscTn assays and their interpretation in patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of ACS.

Basics of Troponin Analysis in Acute Coronary Syndrome

CTnI and cTnT are contractile components present in the myocardium and are exclusive to cardiac muscles.2,3,11 They work in coordination with calcium ions to promote binding of actin and myosin, thus promoting cardiac muscle contraction. CTn consists of troponin T (protein molecule attaching troponin complex to actin), troponin C (calcium binding site) and troponin I (inhibits myosin head interaction in the absence of calcium). While troponin C can be found in both skeletal and cardiac muscles, troponin T and I are specific and sensitive, so are called cardiac-specific troponins.

It is important to understand the concept of the ‘early releasable troponin pool’ (ERTP). Almost 95% of troponin is bound to actin filaments while about 5% of it is free in the cytoplasm, which constitutes the ERTP.12 The troponin in the ERTP is the first to be released following any myocardial injury but, with normal renal function, gets cleared immediately from the blood pool. The structurally bound troponin, on the other hand, is released over a period of several days, causing a gradual rise in troponin. The half-life of cTn is around 2 hours.

Common Definitions of Clinical Importance

While using hscTn assays, interpreting the values requires an in-depth understanding of a few definitions. The precision of the hscTn assay is defined by the coefficient of variation (CoV). This is the ratio of standard deviation to the mean value of a series of troponin samples. Generally, hscTn assays are approved for use per guidelines if their CoV is <10% at the 99th percentile. If the CoV is 10–20%, the test can still be used but tests that have CoV >20% are not acceptable for clinical use.

Limit of blank (LoB) is the highest concentration of troponin reported by a hscTn assay when there is no troponin in the sample. Limit of detection (LoD) refers to the lowest possible concentration of troponin that can reliably be differentiated from LoB. Limit of quantification (LoQ) refers to the lowest troponin concentration reported by a particular laboratory, and this may or may not correlate with LoD. Delta refers to a clinically significant change in troponin levels measured over fixed intervals which is used to identify myocardial injury, even if troponins are in the <99th percentile. The hscTn assays analyze troponin as a continuous variable, rather than a fixed value.

What is High Sensitivity?

An hscTn assay should be able to detect low concentrations of troponins and should have high sensitivity and precision. The Internal Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) Task Force on Cardiac Bio-Markers defines hscTn assays as: having a total imprecision (CoV) ≤10% at the 99th percentile; and being able to measure cTn above the LoD in ≥50% of healthy subjects.4,13 The hscTn assays have increased analytical sensitivity and reduced variability, which facilitates integration into clinical pathways.7

Therefore, hscTn assays should be able to measure troponins consistently and accurately in a majority of healthy individuals (who have very low concentrations) with negligible variability. Multiple factors affect hscTn assay results, including age, sex, standardization of methods and specimen type, and these should be considered while reporting absolute values. As an example, men usually have a slightly higher value than women.6,13 Also, patients aged over 60 years have relatively higher troponin at baseline.14 The IFCC recommends establishing the 99th percentile for any particular assay using appropriate statistical power, which requires a minimum of 300 male and 300 female patients.

What do the Guidelines Say?

The IFCC guidelines recommend hscTn assays because of their ability to measure cTn values above the assay’s LoD in more than 50% of individuals.6,13 The 2015 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines give a class I indication for use of both the rapid 0/1-hour rule-out and rule-in protocols and the 0/3-hour protocol.7 The European algorithm allows triage in about 75% of patients. It is important to remember that all troponin assays are associated with some false positive and false negative results, but this is minimal with hscTn.

Approved High-sensitivity Troponin Assays

There are at least four hscTn assays that are approved and in clinical use. One of them measures troponin T (Elecsys®, Roche Diagnostics) and the other three assays measure troponin I (ARCHITECT STAT troponin I, Abbott; Access hs-cTnI, Beckman Coulter; hs-cTnI ADVIA Centaur, Siemens). The reference ranges for each of the individual tests is shown in Table 1.

Algorithms Using High-sensitivity Troponin Assays

At least four protocols are worth discussing:

  • rule-out strategies using hscTn;
  • accelerated protocol with serial repeat hscTn assays for rule-out/rule-in;
  • hscTn combined with risk scores; and
  • single hscTn measurement.

Rule-out Strategies Using hscTn: Absent Troponin at Presentation

As hscTn assays measure very low troponin values, it makes sense that a one-time troponin assay should be able to exclude ACS with a very high clinical diagnostic accuracy (negative predictive value). A number of studies have shown that a low concentration of troponin levels using hscTn assays, below the LoD or LoB, has a very high negative predictive value (Table 2).15–20 Troponin levels lower than LoD values can exclude ACS with >99% confidence according to published meta-analyses.21,22 However, unstable angina cannot be ruled out with this approach.23 The FDA does not allow reporting troponin levels below 6 ng/dl, which is greater than both the LoD and the LoB for the Roche hscTn assay. This technically prevents patients being discharged from ED on the basis of on a single low concentration hscTn and opinions on this issue have been mixed.24 Of note, low troponin values below the LoD may have a lower sensitivity, so the ESC guidelines recommend re-testing >3-hour symptom onset before presentation when troponin values are less than the LoD.25 There are a few unanswered questions with this approach including: should the test be done on all patients or only those with non-ischemic EKGs? Should LoB or LoD be used? Will the test maintain CoV <10% at such low level troponins?

Accelerated Protocol with Serial Repeat hscTn Assays for Rule-in/Rule-out

Most centers in the US use longer troponin rule-out algorithms.26,27 However, the 2015 ESC guidelines give a class I recommendation for 0/1-hour hscTn protocol.7 A few 1- and 2-hour algorithms use hscTn.28–31 The presence of serial, dynamic hscTn promotes an early rule-in ACS with higher specificity whereas the absence of serial hscTn elevation promotes early rule-out ACS with high sensitivity.4,32,33 It is important to remember that dynamic troponin elevation does not confirm ACS as it could indicate MI. In addition, an absolute increase in troponin concentration has been shown to have a higher diagnostic accuracy than relative changes in troponins.34

Relevant Approved High-Sensitivity Troponin Assays

Open in new tab
Open ppt

High-sensitivity Cardiac Troponin with Risk Scores

A few studies have examined the use of EKG, hscTn, and clinical risk prediction scores at some centers.35–40 Most of these covered accelerated diagnostic protocols combining some risk scores, most commonly Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI). Data on what would be the most appropriate risk score and the ideal troponin assay to use are still limited. Future studies testing combinations of various test scores with different hscTn assays are essential.

Single High-sensitivity Cardiac Troponin at Presentation

The concept of selecting a threshold for hscTn based on clinical need rather than the analytical ability of the test has been emerging recently, as shown in the High-Sensitivity Troponin in the Evaluation of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome (High-STEACS) study.41 The investigators did not use the LoD or LoB cut-offs, but rather they used a fixed cut-off of 5 ng/l to safely discharge patients with possible ACS. The study showed a negative predictive value of 99.6% for the primary outcome of index MI, subsequent MI, or early cardiac mortality.

Interpreting Elevated Troponin at Presentation

Any degree of troponin elevation, irrespective of etiology, is associated with a poor prognosis.42–45 That said, troponin values five times the normal have been shown to be associated with poor outcomes in ACS with an estimated positive predictive value of 90% and a specificity of >95%. Serial troponin rise is important to define MI, so stable elevated values over a period of time should be investigated for the presence of possible macrocomplexes, even while using hscTn assays.46

What is the Ideal Time to Repeat Troponin Assays?

In patients with symptoms suggestive of ACS, it is recommended that an initial troponin should be taken at presentation, followed by a second sample obtained at a fixed time interval between 1 and 3 hours. The idea behind obtaining a second troponin with the hscTn assay is to identify clinically significant changes in troponin levels, both relative and absolute. Since small relative changes in troponin elevations could be related to the analytical errors of the test itself, it is recommended that absolute rather than relative changes in troponin levels are used.47–49

A number of studies have compared the efficacy of 1-, 2-, and 3-hour repeat troponins. Studies have shown that 1- and 2-hour algorithms carry similar sensitivities of >96% and a negative predictive value of >99%, while the 3-hour algorithm appears to have a mildly lower sensitivity but similar negative predictive value.18,51–54 As 1-hour algorithms depend on a small rise in troponin concentration, this may carry a risk of missing an ACS. Therefore, the 2-hour repeat strategy seems to be the most reasonable approach, even though guidelines do not support one over the other. As mentioned above, using risk scores, including the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) or History, ECG, Age, Risk factors and Troponin (HEART) score, along with the hscTn assay could help to improve the sensitivity of analysis. The HEART score seems to be preferred above other risk scores.55 Nevertheless, to avoid unsafe early discharges in patients with evolving ACS, it is essential to consider the overall picture including serial EKGs and risk assessment tools.

To summarize, there are at least six algorithms. The 0/3-hour algorithm from the European guidelines and the 2–hour advanced diagnostic pathway use risk score prediction tools whereas the 0/2-hour, 0/1-hour ESC, modified 0/1-hour ESC and the current US state-of-the-art algorithms (6- and 12-hour troponins) do not include risk prediction tools.

While implementing the early rule-in/rule-out algorithms, it is essential to make sure that the patient has had chest pains for at least 3 hours before presentation, or an evolving ACS may be missed, and an erroneous early discharge made.

While using these algorithms, patients should be involved in shared decision making, especially where there is a low likelihood of ACS and the patient cannot stay longer because of other reasons. In such cases, it is essential to advise the patient regarding the risks and to establish an outpatient follow-up within a reasonable amount of time.

Type I Versus Other Types of Myocardial Injury

An ideal troponin assay should not only identify a possible myocardial injury but also help practitioners to understand the pathophysiology of MI. Differentiating whether an MI is a true type I MI secondary to a plaque rupture causing a type I MI, or various other mimics of plaque rupture including but not limited to cardiomyopathy, myocarditis, pulmonary embolism with right heart strain, hypertensive emergency, coronary vasospasm, stress cardiomyopathy, or demand ischemia.56 Knowing this is important when deciding the next step in patient care and to avoid unnecessary investigations and anxiety.

Unfortunately, most troponin assays, including hscTn, cannot be used to differentiate between different types of MI using one absolute value. This could be related to the various cut-off values for the different algorithms and so practitioners are left with to depend on serial troponin (whether a 1-hour or 6-hour repeat) and serial EKG changes. Even in the current era of hscTn, differentiating between various types of MIs continues to be a challenge. However, hscTn has be shown to diagnose fewer MIs than conventional troponins, so is less likely to give false-positive results for other types of MI.57

Rapid Rule-In/Rule-Out Algorithm With Undetectable Troponin At Presentation Study

Open in new tab
Open ppt

The Indeterminate Grey Zone

A limitation of using hscTn is there is a subgroup of patients who clearly do not fit into the rule-in or the rule-out algorithms. About 15–40% of patients fall into an indeterminate grey zone.30,50,58,59 These patients have an intermediate to a high risk of having a cardiac event, including death, with an ACS incidence of 5–20%.30,50,52,58,59 The ESC guidance document recommends using clinical judgement while dealing with patients in this grey zone.60 

This focuses on patients:

  • who experience typical symptoms but have hscTn less than the 99th percentile;
  • who experience typical symptoms with hscTn less than the 99th percentile but at least above LoD;
  • who experience typical symptoms with hscTn greater than the 99th percentile but without any dynamic change in levels during repetition; and
  • who experience typical symptoms with hscTn greater than the 99th percentile and with dynamic change in the levels during repetition but without any acute coronary pathology including rupture, erosion or dissection.

This involves reviewing previous medical records for chronic hscTn elevations, performing serial EKGs, repeating hscTn at a fixed time interval, and using a risk prediction tool (preferably the HEART score). This helps to classify patients who fall into this grey zone as low, intermediate and high risk.

Age- and Sex-specific Algorithms

At least four clinical variables correlate with outcomes in patients with ACS including age, sex, time of chest pain onset and renal dysfunction. Three algorithms have been proposed. The first incorporates all four parameters, but is not commonly used. The second algorithm uses sex-specific cut-offs but does not account for renal dysfunction and age; this is because previous studies have shown that women presenting with ACS are older than men by almost 5–8 years on average.61–63 Female sex is usually associated with relatively lower troponin, but the age factor compensates well for the troponin difference without the need for using age-adjusted cut-off values (the higher age in women increases their troponin levels and corrects the age difference). However, using only sex-specific cut-off values reclassifies only a few patients into a different risk category compared to uniform cut-off criteria.61,64 The third model, recommended by the ESC guidelines, uses uniform cut-off values for all patients without accounting for age, sex, or renal function.7 Further research on the effect of these confounder variables on hscTn assays is essential.

Conclusion

HscTn is clearly a significant advance in the early and accurate diagnosis of ACS and has the potential to improve patient outcomes through early, appropriate evidence-based interventions.

In patients who do not have ACS, it helps to rule out MI and helps to discharge patients early, thus reducing patient anxiety, unnecessary admissions and costs.

It is important to understand how to interpret hscTn results because they differ from conventional troponin assays. In addition, there is an intermediate zone where it is difficult to rule in or rule out MI. Until further evidence becomes available, clinicians should combine hscTn with appropriate risk prediction tools.

The importance of shared decision making and clinical judgement should never be underestimated.

References
  1. Owens PL, Barrett ML, Gibson TB, et al. Emergency department care in the United States: a profile of national data sources. Ann Emerg Med 2010;56:150–65.
    Crossref | PubMed
  2. Thygesen K, Mair J, Giannitsis E, et al. How to use high-sensitivity cardiac troponins in acute cardiac care. Eur Heart J 2012;33:2252–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  3. Thygesen K, Mair J, Katus H, Plebani M, Venge P, Collinson P, et al. Recommendations for the use of cardiac troponin measurement in acute cardiac care. Eur Heart J 2010;31:2197–204.
    Crossref | PubMed
  4. Apple FS, Jaffe AS, Collinson P, et al. IFCC educational materials on selected analytical and clinical applications of high sensitivity cardiac troponin assays. Clin Biochem 2015;48:201–3.
    Crossref | PubMed
  5. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, Chaitman BR, Bax JJ, Morrow DA, White HD; ESC Scientific Document Group. Fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction (2018). Eur Heart J 2019; 40:237–269.
    Crossref | PubMed
  6. Apple FS, Ler R, Murakami MM. Determination of 19 cardiac troponin I and T assay 99th percentile values from a common presumably healthy population. Clin Chem 2012;58:1574–81.
    Crossref | PubMed
  7. Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet JP, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2016;37:267–315.
    Crossref | PubMed
  8. Reichlin T, Hochholzer W, Bassetti S, et al. Early diagnosis of myocardial infarction with sensitive cardiac troponin assays. N Engl J Med 2009;361:858–67.
    Crossref | PubMed
  9. Shortt C, Ma J, Clayton N, Sherbino J, et al. Rule-in and rule-out of myocardial infarction using cardiac troponin and glycemic biomarkers in patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome. Clin Chem 2017;63:403–14.
    Crossref | PubMed
  10. Latini R, Masson S, Anand IS, et al. Prognostic value of very low plasma concentrations of troponin T in patients with stable chronic heart failure. Circulation 2007;116:1242–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  11. Ooi DS, Isotalo PA, Veinot JP. Correlation of antemortem serum creatine kinase, creatine kinase-MB, troponin I, and troponin T with cardiac pathology. Clin Chem 2000;46:338–44.
    PubMed
  12. Takeda S, Yamashita A, Maeda K, Maéda Y. Structure of the core domain of human cardiac troponin in the Ca(2+)-saturated form. Nature 2003;424:35–41.
    Crossref | PubMed
  13. Apple FS, Collinson PO, Biomarkers ITFoCAoC. Analytical characteristics of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays. Clin Chem 2012;58:54–61.
    Crossref | PubMed
  14. Venge P, Lindahl B. Cardiac troponin assay classification by both clinical and analytical performance characteristics: a study on outcome prediction. Clin Chem 2013;59:976–81.
    Crossref | PubMed
  15. Body R, Carley S, McDowell G, et al. Rapid exclusion of acute myocardial infarction in patients with undetectable troponin using a high-sensitivity assay. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1332–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  16. Hammerer-Lercher A, Ploner T, Neururer S, et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin T compared with standard troponin T testing on emergency department admission: how much does it add in everyday clinical practice? J Am Heart Assoc 2013;2:e000204.
    Crossref | PubMed
  17. Bandstein N, Ljung R, Johansson M, Holzmann MJ. Undetectable high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T level in the emergency department and risk of myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:2569–78.
    Crossref | PubMed
  18. Parsonage WA, Mueller C, Greenslade JH, et al. Validation of NICE diagnostic guidance for rule out of myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity troponin tests. Heart 2016;102:1279–86.
    Crossref | PubMed
  19. Chenevier-Gobeaux C, Meune C, Lefevre G, et al. A single value of high-sensitive troponin T below the limit of detection is not enough for ruling out non ST elevation myocardial infarction in the emergency department. Clin Biochem 2016;49:1113–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  20. Vafaie M, Slagman A, Möckel M, Hamm C, Huber K, Müller C, et al. Prognostic value of undetectable hs troponin T in suspected acute coronary syndrome. Am J Med 2016;129:274–82.e2.
    Crossref | PubMed
  21. Zhelev Z, Hyde C, Youngman E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of single baseline measurement of Elecsys Troponin T high-sensitive assay for diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction in emergency department: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2015;350:h15.
    Crossref | PubMed
  22. Pickering JW, Than MP, Cullen L, et al. Rapid rule-out of acute myocardial infarction with a single high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T measurement below the limit of detection: a collaborative meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2017;166:715–24.
    Crossref | PubMed
  23. Thelin J, Melander O, Öhlin B. Early rule-out of acute coronary syndrome using undetectable levels of high sensitivity troponin T. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care 2015;4:403–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  24. Body R, Mahler S. Welcome to the real world: do the conditions of FDA approval devalue high-sensitivity troponin? Acad Emerg Med 2017;24:1278–80.
    Crossref | PubMed
  25. Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet JP, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2016;37:267–315.
    Crossref | PubMed
  26. Hoffmann U, Truong QA, Fleg JL, et al. Design of the Rule Out Myocardial Ischemia/Infarction Using Computer Assisted Tomography: a multicenter randomized comparative effectiveness trial of cardiac computed tomography versus alternative triage strategies in patients with acute chest pain in the emergency department. Am Heart J 2012;163:330–8, 8.e1.
    Crossref | PubMed
  27. Amsterdam EA, Kirk JD, Bluemke DA, et al. Testing of low-risk patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2010;122:1756–76.
    Crossref | PubMed
  28. Reichlin T, Schindler C, Drexler B, et al. One-hour rule-out and rule-in of acute myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:1211–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  29. Reichlin T, Twerenbold R, Wildi K, et al. Prospective validation of a 1–hour algorithm to rule-out and rule-in acute myocardial infarction using a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assay. CMAJ 2015;187:E243–52.
    Crossref | PubMed
  30. Reichlin T, Cullen L, Parsonage WA, et al. Two-hour algorithm for triage toward rule-out and rule-in of acute myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T. Am J Med 2015;128:369–79.e4.
    Crossref | PubMed
  31. Rubini Gimenez M, Twerenbold R, Jaeger C, et al. One-hour rule-in and rule-out of acute myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I. Am J Med 2015;128:861–70.e4.
    Crossref | PubMed
  32. Korley FK, Jaffe AS. Preparing the United States for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:1753–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  33. Keller T, Zeller T, Ojeda F, et al. Serial changes in highly sensitive troponin I assay and early diagnosis of myocardial infarction. JAMA 2011;306:2684–93.
    Crossref | PubMed
  34. Reichlin T, Irfan A, Twerenbold R, et al. Utility of absolute and relative changes in cardiac troponin concentrations in the early diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2011;124:136–45.
    Crossref | PubMed
  35. Cullen L, Mueller C, Parsonage WA, et al. Validation of high-sensitivity troponin I in a 2–hour diagnostic strategy to assess 30–day outcomes in emergency department patients with possible acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62:1242–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  36. Aldous S, Mark Richards A, George PM, et al. Comparison of new point-of-care troponin assay with high sensitivity troponin in diagnosing myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol 2014;177:182–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  37. Meller B, Cullen L, Parsonage WA, et al. Accelerated diagnostic protocol using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T in acute chest pain patients. Int J Cardiol 2015;184:208–15.
    Crossref | PubMed
  38. Carlton EW, Khattab A, Greaves K. Identifying patients suitable for discharge after a single-presentation high-sensitivity troponin result: a comparison of five established risk scores and two high-sensitivity assays. Ann Emerg Med 2015;66:635–45.e1.
    Crossref | PubMed
  39. Chapman AR, Hesse K, Andrews J, et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin i and clinical risk scores in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. Circulation 2018;138:1654–65.
    Crossref | PubMed
  40. Reaney PDW, Elliott HI, Noman A, Cooper JG. Risk stratifying chest pain patients in the emergency department using HEART, GRACE and TIMI scores, with a single contemporary troponin result, to predict major adverse cardiac events. Emerg Med J 2018;35:420–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  41. Shah AS, Anand A, Sandoval Y, et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I at presentation in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome: a cohort study. Lancet 2015;386:2481–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  42. van den Bos EJ, Constantinescu AA, van Domburg RT, et al. Minor elevations in troponin I are associated with mortality and adverse cardiac events in patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J 2011;32:611–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  43. Lasek-Bal A, Kowalewska-Twardela T, Ga˛sior Z, et al. The significance of troponin elevation for the clinical course and outcome of first-ever ischaemic stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis 2014;38:212–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  44. Høiseth AD, Neukamm A, Hagve TA, et al. The clinical value of serial measurement of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T in acute exacerbations ofchronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Open Heart 2014;1:e000001.
    Crossref | PubMed
  45. Purcell JB, Patel M, Khera A, et al. Relation of troponin elevation to outcome in patients with infective endocarditis. Am J Cardiol 2008;101:1479–81.
    Crossref | PubMed
  46. Kavsak PA, Roy C, Malinowski P, et al. Macrocomplexes and discordant high-sensitivity cardiac troponin concentrations. Ann Clin Biochem 2018;55:500–4.
    Crossref | PubMed
  47. Kavsak PA, Jaffe AS, Greene DN, et al. Total analytic error for low cardiac troponin concentrations (≤10 ng/l) by use of a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assay. Clin Chem 2017;63:1043–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  48. Boeddinghaus J, Nestelberger T, Twerenbold R, et al. Direct comparison of 4 very early rule-out strategies for acute myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I. Circulation 2017;135:1597–611.
    Crossref | PubMed
  49. Irfan A, Reichlin T, Twerenbold R, et al. Early diagnosis of myocardial infarction using absolute and relative changes in cardiac troponin concentrations. Am J Med 2013;126:781–8.e2.
    Crossref | PubMed
  50. Jaeger C, Wildi K, Twerenbold R, et al. One-hour rule-in and rule-out of acute myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I. Am Heart J 2016;171:92–102.e1–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  51. Mokhtari A, Borna C, Gilje P, et al. A 1–h Combination algorithm allows fast rule-out and rule-in of major adverse cardiac events. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;67:1531–40.
    Crossref | PubMed
  52. McRae AD, Innes G, Graham M, et al. Comparative evaluation of 2–hour rapid diagnostic algorithms for acute myocardial infarction using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T. Can J Cardiol 2017;33:1006–12.
    Crossref | PubMed
  53. Pickering JW, Greenslade JH, Cullen L, et al. Validation of presentation and 3 h high-sensitivity troponin to rule-in and rule-out acute myocardial infarction. Heart 2016;102:1270–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  54. Chapman AR, Anand A, Boeddinghaus J, et al. Comparison of The efficacy and safety of early rule-out pathways for acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2017;135:1586–96.
    Crossref | PubMed
  55. Six AJ, Cullen L, Backus BE, Greenslade J, et al. The HEART score for the assessment of patients with chest pain in the emergency department: a multinational validation study. Crit Pathw Cardiol 2013;12:121–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  56. Body R, Carlton E. Understanding cardiac troponin part 1: avoiding troponinitis. Emerg Med J 2018;35:120–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  57. Sandoval Y, Smith SW, Schulz KM, Murakami MM, Love SA, Nicholson J, et al. Diagnosis of type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction using a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay with sex-specific 99th percentiles based on the third universal definition of myocardial infarction classification system. Clin Chem 2015;61:657–63.
    Crossref | PubMed
  58. Mueller C, Giannitsis E, Christ M, et al. Multicenter evaluation of a 0–hour/1–hour algorithm in the diagnosis of myocardial infarction with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T. Ann Emerg Med 2016;68:76–87.e4.
    Crossref | PubMed
  59. Pickering JW, Greenslade JH, Cullen L, et al. Assessment of the European Society of Cardiology 0–hour/1–hour algorithm to rule-out and rule-in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2016;134:1532–41.
    Crossref | PubMed
  60. Katus H, Ziegler A, Ekinci O, et al. Early diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome. Eur Heart J 2017;38:3049–55.
    Crossref | PubMed
  61. Rubini Gimenez M, Twerenbold R, Boeddinghaus J, et al. Clinical effect of sex-specific cutoff values of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T in suspected myocardial infarction. JAMA Cardiol 2016;1:912–20.
    Crossref | PubMed
  62. Cullen L, Greenslade JH, Carlton EW, et al. Sex-specific versus overall cut points for a high sensitivity troponin I assay in predicting 1–year outcomes in emergency patients presenting with chest pain. Heart. 2016;102:120–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  63. Shah AS, Griffiths M, Lee KK, et al. High sensitivity cardiac troponin and the under-diagnosis of myocardial infarction in women: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2015;350:g7873.
    Crossref | PubMed
  64. Mueller-Hennessen M, Lindahl B, Giannitsis E, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic implications using age- and gender-specific cut-offs for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T – sub-analysis from the TRAPID-AMI study. Int J Cardiol 2016;209:26–33.
    Crossref | PubMed
  65. Andruchow JE, Kavsak PA, McRae AD. Contemporary emergency department management of patients with chest pain: a concise review and guide for the high-sensitivity troponin era. Can J Cardiol 2018;34:98–108.
    Crossref | PubMed
  66. Body R, Burrows G, Carley S, et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin t concentrations below the limit of detection to exclude acute myocardial infarction: a prospective evaluation. Clin Chem 2015;61:983–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  67. Carlton EW, Cullen L, Than M, Gamble J, Khattab A, Greaves K. A novel diagnostic protocol to identify patients suitable for discharge after a single high-sensitivity troponin. Heart 2015;101(13):1041-6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  68. Rubini Giménez M, Hoeller R, Reichlin T, et al. Rapid rule out of acute myocardial infarction using undetectable levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin. Int J Cardiol. 2013;168(4):3896-901.
    Crossref | PubMed
  69. Sandoval Y, Smith SW, Thordsen SE, et al. Diagnostic performance of high sensitivity compared with contemporary cardiac troponin i for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. Clin Chem 2017;63:1594–604.
    Crossref | PubMed